Jump to content

User talk:NorthBySouthBaranof

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Patroit22 (talk | contribs) at 01:30, 5 May 2014 (→‎No need edit explanation: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

hi

it is political and wikipedia is encyclopedia. we do not comment prices and make such comparisons. the sources are written on a blog.

Anderswarr

I am changing brown bear to grizzly bear in coastal Alaska related articles because it is not correct, and this is a fact, to call any North American subspecies of Ursus arctos a "brown bear." Brown bears are also found in Asia and Europe, if you don't know. There it is correct to call any member of U. arctos a "brown bear." It is correct only to call them brown bears in Europe and Asia. Both coastal and non-coastal members are called brown bears. So in America, both coastal and non-coastal members are called grizzly bears. This is not only correct, but it reduces confusion. Calling both inland and coastal members in Eurasia and coastal members of America brown bears and calling inland North American ones grizzly bears is just plain confusing, stupid, and wrong.

For the very reason and to reduce confusion, we now call all North American subspecies grizzlies. The majority of sources still say coastal ones are brown bears, but don't listen to them - they're wrong. If you want to find out why it is correct to call North American ones grizzlies, check out Gary Brown's The Great Bear Almanac or Robert H. Busch's The Grizzly Almanac. The authors say it is correct to call all North American ones grizzlies.

Please stop changing any edits I make that change brown bear to grizzly in North American articles.

Thank you. From User:Anderswarr — Preceding undated comment added 00:43, 20 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The overwhelming common usage in Alaska is to describe the coastal bears as brown bears. This is adhered to by biologists and land managers across the state. You will never hear anyone talk of a "grizzly bear" on the Tongass National Forest, for example. If there is significant academic debate on this point, it should be cited and discussed - but the common name is "brown." For you to call it "stupid" is simply unhelpful. I gather that you have much to learn about the nuances of biological naming. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 02:07, 20 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]


-I apologize for calling "brown bear" stupid when I sent you the last message. I do NOT have much to learn about biological naming, since I am a bear enthusiast and have long learned much about bears. I do understand that the majority of local Alaskans call coastal ones "brown bears" and I respect anyone who calls them by this name. However, there are many people, including me, who still consider "grizzly" to be correct in all locations.

I have posted on the Katmai talkpage why I am changing brown bear to grizzly bear. Please visit the talk page to find out why I am doing so. Thank you.

From User:Anderswarr — Preceding undated comment added 03:01, 22 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

NorthBySouthBaranof,

I am eager to know what "expanding a page by characters" means. On the Kukaklek Lake page, you said that if I expanded it by 1,500 characters you would help me get it nominated on Wikipedia's title page. I am sorry that I did not get around to expanding the page, but maybe you could help me with the newest page I have created, Peninsular brown bear. I would really like to have my contributions be shown on the front page of Wikipedia.

It would be very nice if you could help me get it nominated; I am also eager to know what "Characters" in this case means.

Thanks, NorthBySouthBaranof! From User:Anderswarr Posted on May 2, 2014 — Preceding undated comment added 23:31, 2 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies on the Waters edit

The Original Barnstar
Hi NorthBySouth, My apologies. I noticed you reverted my heading edit and included BLP. I'm somewhat newish to wikipedia. so I;m not completely clear with all protocol. Your edit has been put back. My apologies. I wasn't intending to slander Roger Waters, but rather embelish the nature of his views which in theory are alarmingly controversial to the Israeli population. Kind regards, Kingslove Kingslove2013 (talk) 20:37, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Reference Errors on 4 February

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:38, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited United States National Forest, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Watershed (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:00, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted files

Hey, I deleted the files. I'm going to send you an e-mail, so check your email soon. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 09:09, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Steve Clark (Wall Street) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Steve Clark (Wall Street) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Steve Clark (Wall-Street) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 09:55, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

United States Forest Service

Hi there. I noticed you removed this photo from the "United States Forest Service" article because it shows an NYS DEC ranger. The description on the photo says "U.S. FOREST SERVICE RANGER IN PATROL BOAT AT STILLWATER ON THE HUDSON RIVER". I tried looking at the arm patch, but that didn't help. How do you know this isn't a U.S. Forest Ranger? Thanks. Magnolia677 (talk) 15:14, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The patch and uniform are clearly not USDA Forest Service. See this article about the history of the USFS uniform. There has never been a circular white patch worn on the right shoulder. The uniform of the era had a dome-shaped yellow patch with unit rocker on the left shoulder only. There is also visible collar lettering, which was not a feature of the 1962-1978 FS uniform.
Moreover, USDA Forest Service personnel don't patrol non-Forest Service lands - and there is no National Forest System land on the Hudson River. The caption identifies it as a state forest - and that would not be a place where USFS rangers would patrol. They don't have authority over non-federal lands.
My best guess is that it's an NYS DEC or NYS Forestry ranger/warden. Whoever originally labeled it got it wrong, and nobody ever fact-checks that kind of thing once it goes in an archive, of course. I can't find any good pictures of known old NYS DEC uniforms to confirm it. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 20:21, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Troopers VS Weeman

This is OR?

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/566429325/tropes-vs-women-in-video-games/ <snip> — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nosepea68 (talk • contribs) 00:42, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I'm autotroll for daring to disagree with you?

"Anyone who loves language welcomes useful neologisms. But "troll" is increasingly used to mean only "someone who disagrees with me"."

"I would use "troll" to mean someone who seeks not to enlighten, persuade or amuse, but to "get a rise out of" or pointlessly PROVOKE"

- Richard Dawkins

(That's not me though)(meaning I'm not DR, Nosepea68) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.131.96.90 (talk) 01:03, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If you want a video to get views you can put it as a direct link, BUT for WP not to be a click/view whoring you MUST STATE RHAR THE LINK GIVES A VIEW COUNT. TvsWiVG article is a prime example where you need to put it in a separate column. As per WP is not supposed to be a view count advertisement. Nosepea68 (talk) 01:45, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Mt. Gox, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Wired (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:07, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Articles for creation March 2014 Backlog Elimination Drive

Hello NorthBySouthBaranof:

WikiProject AFC is holding a month long Backlog Elimination Drive!
The goal of this drive is to eliminate the backlog of unreviewed articles. The drive is running from March 1, 2014 to March 31, 2014.

Awards will be given out for all reviewers participating in the drive in the form of barnstars at the end of the drive.
There is a backlog of over 2000 articles, so start reviewing articles! Visit the drive's page and help out!

A new version of our AfC helper script has been released! It includes many bug fixes, new improvements and features, code enhancements, and more. If you want to see a full list of changes, visit the changelog. Please report bugs and feature requests there, too! Thanks.
Posted by Northamerica1000 (talk) on 02:12, 28 February 2014 (UTC) using MediaWiki message delivery (talk), on behalf of WikiProject Articles for creation[reply]

List of medical ethics cases section heading

I saw you retitled a section in the List of medical ethics cases (which includes Jahi McMath). I agree the previous section title was problematic, but there are several cases in that section that are not at all related to mechanical ventilation or life support, so they should probably be moved to another section. (McMath was originally listed in the euthanasia section, which was clearly incorrect.) Funcrunch (talk) 17:38, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Coates arrest

I just want to remind you to be sure to engage in genuine discussion and not simply state the same thing and keep reverting, because that doesn't move the discussion along. I had replied to your comments earlier in the Talk page and you never answered back. Of course you reverted in 7 minutes so we know you're capable of replying. There is consensus that the item about the arrest should go in the article; the current dispute is where in the article it should go, and no one replied to me so I went ahead and added it. Please reply on the Talk page if you want to be constructive. Useitorloseit (talk) 22:15, 6 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. Thanks for your msg re: the above. I've tried to air some thoughts on the matter in a diplomatic and constructive way on my talk page with the user. I've stipulated that I won't go against consensus, but outlining my own thought process might perhaps lead to constructive understanding. I hope you don't mind. S.G.(GH) ping! 19:48, 11 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

RFC on user conduct - assistance requested

Hi - I'm preparing an RFC on user conduct which is currently in draft form. I'd appreciate your input (on the talk page). Funcrunch (talk) 19:12, 8 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A cup of coffee for you!

Hi, This is just to say thank you for the effort to make my article good for Jacob Barnett. Cheers! Ashish Lohorung (talk) 06:24, 13 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Tax as theft

Please see Talk:Taxation in the United States#Tax as theft. You moved it from Income tax in the United States to Taxation in the United States, but it's not really specific to the US. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 15:34, 22 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please feel free to remove it from that article if you don't think it belongs there! NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 05:08, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your RfA support

Hi there, a bit of a form letter from me, Cyphoidbomb, but I wanted to drop you a line and thank you for your support at my recent RfA. Although I was not successful, I certainly learned quite a bit both about the RfA process and about how the community views my contributions. It was an eye-opener, to say the least. Thank you! Cyphoidbomb (talk) 00:36, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Cyphoidbomb, it says a lot more about the state of the encyclopedia's consensus processes than it does your fitness for the mop and bucket. Keep doing good. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 01:54, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Jason Russell

I just want to apologize for any conflicting edits. And thanks for cleaning up the language on the RfC. 173.79.251.253 (talk) 03:16, 2 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of sourced material

Is vandalism. Benkenobi18 (talk) 09:27, 7 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

please engage in dialog before making substantial edits

Please choose to engage in the collaborative process of dialog on an article's talk page before substantially restructuring the article, as in the case of Vance McAllister. Thanks. BlueSalix (talk) 18:09, 9 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the eyes on the article. It seems like there are some editors who have a significant lack of understanding about what BLP means. Gaijin42 (talk) 18:10, 9 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again for your assistance and support. Hopefully they get the message and stick to the sources when they come back. Gaijin42 (talk) 20:36, 9 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It is amusing

but it's probably better to stay off the guy's talk page once he asks... sheesh, what is it about Sarkeesian that gets them so riled up? I just don't get it.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 21:49, 27 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

ANI

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Cyberbullying_over_article_about_Anita_Sarkeesian— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 23:17, 27 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Bundy standoff

The Wikipedia community has permitted administrators to impose discretionary sanctions on any editor who is active on the Bundy standoff article. Discretionary sanctions can be used against an editor who repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behavior, or any normal editorial process. If you engage in further inappropriate behavior in this area, you may be placed under sanctions, which can include blocks or a page ban. All editors are also subject to WP:1RR at the article (one revert per editor per article per 24 hour period). The discussion leading to the imposition of these sanctions can be read here. These sanctions and the 1RR restriction will end on June 22, 2014.

Please familiarise yourself with the information page at Talk:Bundy standoff/General Sanctions.

Tiptoety talk 21:25, 29 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

April 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Bundy standoff may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 04:13, 30 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please ask for specific citations

Please ask for specific citations where you need citations on the bitcoin article. Please do not delete everything in my contribution - including many items that are just repetitions of statements already referenced in the bitcoin article. Please be Wikipedia cooperative and not disruptive. Please indicate spicifically what you need to be referenced. I do not know what you want referenced. Or do you want every word referenced? Please read the Talk page on bitcoin and you will see that I have been involved in long discussions on the talk page. I do not remember seeing your name taking part in the long discussions on the bitcoin talk page. My discussions are there including with regard to what you simply deleted because you know how to use WP tools.SpiltOctacle (talk) 08:43, 2 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Edit warring notice

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

Information icon Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you.

WP:AN3

Hi, NBSB. I understand why you nowiki'd the references in the quotes you provided at AN3, but in practice it made the text really hard to read, and as for trying to compare the two passages you offered… it was frustrating. An option in similar cases might be to leave the refs as they are and simply add the <references/> template below the post, making them show up as footnotes. Anyway. You do good work, happy editing! Bishonen | talk 11:51, 3 May 2014 (UTC).[reply]

Actually, I didn't nowiki them, lol... I think it was the person who made the report. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 15:47, 3 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Ha. Well, moot now anyway. Bishonen | talk 15:57, 3 May 2014 (UTC).[reply]

Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership

Please engage in article Talk on specific issues for content that you restored. Thanks.CFredkin (talk) 23:15, 4 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No need edit explanation

NorthBySouthBaranof Why is there no need for this factual information?Patroit22 (talk) 01:30, 5 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:NorthBySouthBaranof&oldid=607102838"